Lillard to Miami trade imminent; Herro to the Spurs makes too much sense

[Mr. Body]

Last year, the team started out pretty compe ive. Then the Josh Primo thing happened. Then Wesley got injured. At some point they pulled the plug discretely and went into a tank mode that involved drastically underemphasizing defense and sitting players. Tanking involves deliberately losing games. I don't think they started the season that way, but something did change.

I won't say they'll be highly compe ive this year, but I can't see them tanking. That's a horrible tactic with young players who want to win. They need to start learning how to close quarters, kill runs, score down the stretch, make stops. They just won the Power Lotto to the tune of a billion dollars, it doesn't make sense to go all in on the lottery again.

[spurraider21]

Last year, the team started out pretty compe ive. Then the Josh Primo thing happened. Then Wesley got injured. At some point they pulled the plug discretely and went into a tank mode that involved drastically underemphasizing defense and sitting players. Tanking involves deliberately losing games. I don't think they started the season that way, but something did change.

I won't say they'll be highly compe ive this year, but I can't see them tanking. That's a horrible tactic with young players who want to win. They need to start learning how to close quarters, kill runs, score down the stretch, make stops. They just won the Power Lotto to the tune of a billion dollars, it doesn't make sense to go all in on the lottery again.

josh primo and blake wesley playing more minutes would have likely led to even more losses

there was nothing discreet about trading our best player during the offseason and not getting anything back to help the 22-23 team. we got gallinari (waived) and a bunch of future picks. the only offseason signing we made to the 15 man roster was roby. this was not a team trying to build a winner in 22-23, which was a wise move. they are taking the same approach so far into the 23-24 season. im not saying its the wrong approach. its just what they're doing

if you want to say its not tanking until you see the in-game or in-season decisions, fine. im just evaluating their approach this offseason, which is the same as last season

[exstatic]

josh primo and blake wesley playing more minutes would have likely led to even more losses

there was nothing discreet about trading our best player during the offseason and not getting anything back to help the 22-23 team. we got gallinari (waived) and a bunch of future picks. the only offseason signing we made to the 15 man roster was roby. this was not a team trying to build a winner in 22-23, which was a wise move. they are taking the same approach so far into the 23-24 season. im not saying its the wrong approach. its just what they're doing

if you want to say its not tanking until you see the in-game or in-season decisions, fine. im just evaluating their approach this offseason, which is the same as last season

We didn't trade away an All Star this summer, but we did each of the last two summers. Not the same.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on tanking. I see it as intentional, a dumping of games. OKC did nothing to improve last summer, but I don't think anyone saw their #10 draft placement as tanking. They just rolled with what they had, and didn't overpay for mid FAs on the market.

[spurraider21]

We didn't trade away an All Star this summer, but we did each of the last two summers. Not the same.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on tanking. I see it as intentional, a dumping of games. OKC did nothing to improve last summer, but I don't think anyone saw their #10 draft placement as tanking. They just rolled with what they had, and didn't overpay for mid FAs on the market.

we didnt have one to trade ...

its like having 10 dollars. giving away 5 two years ago, giving away 5 more last year, and then saying "well at least we didnt lose $5 again"... when you have 0 to work with

yes, i know we all have expectations of wemby, but his arrival was a formality, not really an active decision to make. i dont see us being as bad as last year. but the FO definitely wasnt making any effort to maximize our wins this year

[Mr. Body]

josh primo and blake wesley playing more minutes would have likely led to even more losses

there was nothing discreet about trading our best player during the offseason and not getting anything back to help the 22-23 team. we got gallinari (waived) and a bunch of future picks. the only offseason signing we made to the 15 man roster was roby. this was not a team trying to build a winner in 22-23, which was a wise move. they are taking the same approach so far into the 23-24 season. im not saying its the wrong approach. its just what they're doing

if you want to say its not tanking until you see the in-game or in-season decisions, fine. im just evaluating their approach this offseason, which is the same as last season

I'm a little tired of the "Primo sucks" bandwagon. Regardless, the team was very compe ive to begin the season - they beat Philadelphia and Minnesota twice - and then things shifted. I don't give a about that offseason, but the Dejounte trade was for a long term future and how he didn't have a place there. They didn't want to pay White, they didn't want to pay Murray. You're missing the difference between tanking and playing hard. They came into the season last year clearly not wanting to tank and they shifted.

[spurraider21]

I'm a little tired of the "Primo sucks" bandwagon.

ok?

Regardless, the team was very compe ive to begin the season - they beat Philadelphia and Minnesota twice - and then things shifted. I don't give a about that offseason, but the Dejounte trade was for a long term future and how he didn't have a place there. They didn't want to pay White, they didn't want to pay Murray. You're missing the difference between tanking and playing hard. They came into the season last year clearly not wanting to tank and they shifted.

i think you are

players dont tank. players never lose on purpose. these guys are playing for their next contract.

tanking is an organizational thing. they put the team in a position to not be able to win games, even if the players are earnestly trying and playing hard. you can brush it off as "they didnt want to pay good player a and good player b" but thats what it is. the organization intentionally bottomed out and they won the prize in wemby.

[Joseph Kony]

the sniffers continuing to tell themselves the Spurs werent intentionally tanking the moment they traded DJ
thinking winning 5 of the first 7 games means anything


horrendous takes

[Mr. Body]

ok?


i think you are

players dont tank. players never lose on purpose. these guys are playing for their next contract.

tanking is an organizational thing. they put the team in a position to not be able to win games, even if the players are earnestly trying and playing hard. you can brush it off as "they didnt want to pay good player a and good player b" but thats what it is. the organization intentionally bottomed out and they won the prize in wemby.

Now you're just trying to parse some completely pointless side thing. And yes, players do tank. Regardless, in' A, the Spurs entered the season not tanking, then they did. That's it. That's the whole story. No one in the world believes they're going to lose on purpose again other than some weird cadre on SpursTalk.

[spurraider21]

Now you're just trying to parse some completely pointless side thing. And yes, players do tank.

nah. these guys are playing for their careers. i dont think tre, keldon, collins, etc were out there trying to lose games. they have no reason to do so. collins is a year away from FA. tre was just in his first free agency. they want bigger paychecks and security. throwing games and tarnishing their film would not be something they'd willingly do.

Regardless, in' A, the Spurs entered the season not tanking, then they did. That's it. That's the whole story.

i disagree. they entered the season having traded away their best player and having added no immediate help. that they won a few early games doesnt convince me of much other than a nice flukey start.

No one in the world believes they're going to lose on purpose again other than some weird cadre on SpursTalk.

i have never said the players lose on purpose, and have said the opposite.

my position is that this offseason, short of using and not trading away the #1 overall pick, the FO has made no moves to improve the odds of winning games this season. i'm not even saying that as a criticism. its just what it is. i think what we are all hoping to see is that guys like vassell, sochan, branham, champagnie, etc all take steps forward in their development such that the team improves organically. im sure thats the FO's expectation as well. but they certainly havent gone out of their way to give the team a talent infusion

[TD 21]

Local Craptors mouthpiece Grange claims in order to consummate Lillard trade, they'd have to lift the protections on the '24 1st and speculates the Spurs could insist on Gradey D (who Spears claims the Trail Blazers have significant interest in) as payment.

Raptors are in the mix for Damian Lillard. But is it a good idea? (sportsnet.ca)

[spurraider21]

Local Craptors mouthpiece Grange claims in order to consummate Lillard trade, they'd have to lift the protections on the '24 1st and speculates the Spurs could insist on Gradey D (who Spears claims the Trail Blazers have significant interest in) as payment.

Raptors are in the mix for Damian Lillard. But is it a good idea? (sportsnet.ca)

it seems counter-intuitive that the raptors would pay the spurs to lift protections, though i guess in the context of the raptors acquiring lillard, we'd still think of that as a worse pick for the spurs... ie a top 6 protected 2024 raptors pick is likely a better pick than an unprotected 2024 pick with lillard in the fold

even if we were to grant for the sake of argument that the raptors would pay the spurs for lifting the raptors protection, seems like a steep price. would be pretty awesome from the spurs perspective though. would be at the very lest mcdermott's natural successor as he heads into the last year of his deal

cant see it going down that way though

[TD 21]

It sounds like the most likely current scenario is . . .

To Suns: Anunoby and Nurkic
To Trail Blazers: Ayton, Gradey D., Boucher, Porter and draft capital from Craptors
To Craptors: Lillard and Camara.

Spurs need to play hardball and not do Craptors any more favors.

It's an example though, since so many are tied up with contingencies and virtually all have general uncertainty, there's a fine line between patience and overt cautiousness that the Spurs will have to walk with their draft capital.

[exstatic]

Rather than Grady, I'd insist on an unprotected FRP swap WAY out into the future when Dame will be gone. Grady would just be one more mouth to feed at the development trough, and we don't need that right now.

[Bruno]

I guess we all have a different opinion on what "tanking" means.

To clarify my point:
- When you look at Spurs roster, they are so unproven at PF/C. There is Zach Collins, who isn't the most durable player, and 5 players (Sochan, Wembanyama, Mamu, Bassey and Barlow) with very little NBA experience. Sochan, a 20 years old sop re, is the second most experienced big on the roster which is kinda crazy.
- Wright could have easily add a vet PF/C on an one year contract, dozens were available.
- While obviously not adding that vet open more playing time for the young players, I also think Wright didn't add that player because it would have improved the team.

[exstatic]

I guess we all have a different opinion on what "tanking" means.

To clarify my point:
- When you look at Spurs roster, they are so unproven at PF/C. There is Zach Collins, who isn't the most durable player, and 5 players (Sochan, Wembanyama, Mamu, Bassey and Barlow) with very little NBA experience. Sochan, a 20 years old sop re, is the second most experienced big on the roster which is kinda crazy.
- Wright could have easily add a vet PF/C on an one year contract, dozens were available.
- While obviously not adding that vet open more playing time for the young players, I also think Wright didn't add that player because it would have improved the team.

I don't think any scrubby center available on a one year would improve the team. Decent quality centers won't sign for one year.

Sochan is the fourth most experienced big. Collins, Mamu, and Bassey all have more games played and seasons than Jeremy.

[spurraider21]

I don't think any scrubby center available on a one year would improve the team. Decent quality centers won't sign for one year.

Sochan is the fourth most experienced big. Collins, Mamu, and Bassey all have more games played and seasons than Jeremy.

[Bruno]

Sochan is the fourth most experienced big. Collins, Mamu, and Bassey all have more games played and seasons than Jeremy.

I'm going with minutes played.

[CGD]

Local Craptors mouthpiece Grange claims in order to consummate Lillard trade, they'd have to lift the protections on the '24 1st and speculates the Spurs could insist on Gradey D (who Spears claims the Trail Blazers have significant interest in) as payment.

Raptors are in the mix for Damian Lillard. But is it a good idea? (sportsnet.ca)

Lift protections seems odd, no? I think he means they’d like to reacquire the pick or make the protections only for this year? That in turns allows the Raps flexibility to also add additional firsts sooner as their 2024 is no longer en bered. Otherwise it doesn’t make sense to me.

And in that case, yeah, insist on Grady as the price.

[CGD]

Rather than Grady, I'd insist on an unprotected FRP swap WAY out into the future when Dame will be gone. Grady would just be one more mouth to feed at the development trough, and we don't need that right now.

I think they’d figure it out for Grady. The development jam point is overstated in my view. Yes they had three picks last year, but they also lost Primo. Im not convinced Wesley sticks, nor do I think the Mamus, Barlows, Champagnes, Basseys get the full “developmental” treatment either. They’re quality fringe guys but still fringe. Tre, Collins, Doug, etc. are who they are. And going forward I think many of the picks get packaged for more established players.

[buttsR4rebounding]

Rather than Grady, I'd insist on an unprotected FRP swap WAY out into the future when Dame will be gone. Grady would just be one more mouth to feed at the development trough, and we don't need that right now.

That makes more sense to me as well.

[spurraider21]

Lift protections seems odd, no? I think he means they’d like to reacquire the pick or make the protections only for this year? That in turns allows the Raps flexibility to also add additional firsts sooner as their 2024 is no longer en bered. Otherwise it doesn’t make sense to me.

And in that case, yeah, insist on Grady as the price.

nah, they'd lift the protections such that the spurs basically get the raptors unprotected 2024 pick (as opposed to top 6 protected). since the pick is guaranteed to convey in 2024, it frees up their ability to trade their 2026 and 2028 picks. also frees up their ability to offer a swap in 2025. right now, the pick is top 6 protected in 2024, 2025, and 2026 so they cant trade any other FRPs until 2028.

typically, lifting the protection is meant to benefit the team receiving the pick (here, the spurs). but in this case, an unprotected 2024 first from a raptors team starring Siakam/Lillard is probably a pretty bad one well into the 20s, whereas the protected first from the current version of the raptors likely yields a pick in the teens

given that dynamic, the spurs would be able to ask for an asset in exchange for making the pick unprotected as part of a larger lillard trade

[CGD]

nah, they'd lift the protections such that the spurs basically get the raptors unprotected 2024 pick (as opposed to top 6 protected). since the pick is guaranteed to convey in 2024, it frees up their ability to trade their 2026 and 2028 picks. also frees up their ability to offer a swap in 2025. right now, the pick is top 6 protected in 2024, 2025, and 2026 so they cant trade any other FRPs until 2028.

typically, lifting the protection is meant to benefit the team receiving the pick (here, the spurs). but in this case, an unprotected 2024 first from a raptors team starring Siakam/Lillard is probably a pretty bad one well into the 20s, whereas the protected first from the current version of the raptors likely yields a pick in the teens

given that dynamic, the spurs would be able to ask for an asset in exchange for making the pick unprotected as part of a larger lillard trade

That’s what I figured. It’s about them being able to trade more of their picks sooner. And, agreed, an unprotected 24TOR FRP appeals less to me with a Dame-Paskal-Barnes-Jakob starting line up.

[exstatic]

I think they’d figure it out for Grady. The development jam point is overstated in my view. Yes they had three picks last year, but they also lost Primo. Im not convinced Wesley sticks, nor do I think the Mamus, Barlows, Champagnes, Basseys get the full “developmental” treatment either. They’re quality fringe guys but still fringe. Tre, Collins, Doug, etc. are who they are. And going forward I think many of the picks get packaged for more established players.

We could have 3 picks next year. We could have 3 picks in 2025. It’s not overstated, and it’s not just about roster spots. Young players need to be developed, not just rostered.

[exstatic]

Lift protections seems odd, no? I think he means they’d like to reacquire the pick or make the protections only for this year? That in turns allows the Raps flexibility to also add additional firsts sooner as their 2024 is no longer en bered. Otherwise it doesn’t make sense to me.

And in that case, yeah, insist on Grady as the price.

That pick is locked up until 2026, because it might not convey in 24,25, or 26, so they can’t trade a FRP until 2028, limiting the number of FRPs they can flip to PDX in a Lillard trade. If they lift the protections, the pick WILL convey in 2024, and they can start with a swap to PDX in 2025,and go out from there to 2030..

[exstatic]

That’s what I figured. It’s about them being able to trade more of their picks sooner. And, agreed, an unprotected 24TOR FRP appeals less to me with a Dame-Paskal-Barnes-Jakob starting line up.

That’s why you get compensation for agreeing to alter the trade parameters. The pick goes from a likely 7-14 scenario to sure fire mid to late 20s.